The Daily times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1886-1889, 1887-10-04

investigate the forged Otsy telegram
was called 10 order yesterday afternoon
at $40 o'clock. Councilman F. G..
Murphy was present, as were also Detec-
tive John Wren, Commonwealth AttOr-
ney Witt. Mayor Darlington and a num-
ber of others. The room was crow ed,
and much interest was shown in the i'm
yestigation.
Mayor Darlington was the first witness.
lie said that he had no official infOrma-
tiOn on the subject that he had read an
account Of the bogus telegram to MI. OF
ley in the papers and had been requested
10 make an investigation. He had done
so, and lad placed the matter IN charge
of Sergeant Alexander TOmlinson IN
Washington and officer Hall IN Rich
mond lie had declined 10 employ de-
tecliye.
Mr.. s. b Witt, C0mmonwealth's At
fornev next testified that he had visited
Washington to investigate this subject
and while he was satisfied that q forgery
had been committed, the crime had been
committed in the District Of Columbia,
and he had no ground for issuing war
rant against any one in Richmond.
Detective John Wren was next called.
He turned over TO the committee certain
papers which had been given him for the
purpose OF comparing the handwriting
of letters written by Councilman Muir
phy with the original telegram filed in
the telegraph Office i'm Washington. Mr..
Wren was asked If he had seen any one
in Washington who had received this
telegram. lie replied he had and was
asked If he had received any information
from him.
Judge Waddin, counsel for Mr.. Muir
ply, objected to this as hearsay evidence
SIR Meredith contended that this was
not q legal investigation, and even II MI
Wren's testimony was not legal, 1t was
within the province of the committee.
which wanted TO get all the information
possible that could give any light which
could lead 10 the truth This inycstga-
ton was merely to find out where and
how they could learn The truth.
Mr.. Bland. chairman of the committee,
decided that Mr Wren could be heard
his testimony not 10 be official, but only
for information.
Mr.. Wren then said he had seen one
John Leonard, operator at the Baltimore
and Ohio telegraph Office I'm Washington,
who received the telegram, and had dcs-
cribed 20 him man greatly resembling
i'm appearance Mr. Murphy, who, be said,
left il at the office lie also said that If
he came TO Richmond he could Identify
the man Witness then saw the mana
ger of the telegraph company, and in
ouired about the original telegram. lie
then employed an expert detective of
Washington. Mr. John A. Elinger
chief clerk I'm the Solicitors Office Of the
Treasury Department He left with FL
linger the letter written him by Murphy
given him for the purpose Of comparing
his handwriting with that of the tele
gram. After seeing the letters and the
telegram, Ellinger pronounced them writ
ten bv the same person.
MT. Meredith then asked if there was
any other evidence that he knew OF con-
Meeting Murphy with the telegram,
lie replied that newsbOy on the train
told him that he saw a man so much like
Murphy that if it was not he, 10 was some
one that could not be told from him, get
of the train at Milford.
Being cross examined by Mr.. Waddill,
Mr.. Wren said the boy was named
Charles Sancho, and lived in this city at
8l1 Henry street.
The rest of the crOss-examination was
to the e ect that it could not be proven
that the letters furnished Mr.. Wren were
written by Mr. Murphy.
On this point Mr. Wren said that he
was not am expert in handwriting, and,
therefore. incompetent TO decide whether
OF not the letters and the telegram were
In the same handwriting.
Sergeant Alexander IOmlinsOn next
took the stand He stated that he had
been detailed by the Mayor to go to
Washington to investigate this matter
When he got there he got detective,
and went to the office OF Mr. Cox, who
went with him TO the general Office OF the
Baltimore and Ohio telegraph office,
where he showed a tracing of the tele-
gram lie then went to see Leonard, the
telegraph operator who described the
man who sent the telegram, and who
wrote the message; said "hurry j; off,
and went out. The description CORE
sponded with Murphy's appearance.
Being cross ss-examined he said that he
was under the impression that the man
was Murphy. because he thought he saw
similarity in the handwriting in the
letters furnished him and the telegram,
and because he knew that Murphy had
been in Otley's employ and was familiar
with his business
Mr.. John W. Otey then took the
stand He said that at a former meeting
Of the committee he stated that the tele-
gram was received at his office at -
o'clock, but he did not get it until 4
O'Clock Ia this he was mistaken, as IL
had been recalled 10 his memory since
that 10 was a much earlier hour of the
day.
On cross examination be said that he
did not think Mr. Murphy sent the tele-
gram. as he thought he had too much
sense that he had nothing In his POSSES
sion TO fix the crime on Murphy, though
he was free to confess that the handwrit-
inc Of the telegram and that of Murphy
were very similar.
The letters were then shown 10 the
committee for their inspection. Letters
written Mr. Otley were also produced to
show that his own handwriting was very
much like Mr.. Murphys, the object OF
this being to show that no proof OF guilt
q - me. If